IMO it's too low.
100 Bucks before X-Mass FTW!!!!!!!
Topic: Bitcoin price is too high at 20$/BTC (Read 10859 times)
But my real point is that the exchange markets exist because of convience, not necessity.
True, but from that follows that those who would adopt Bitcoin because it is easier/cheaper than say Paypal would be eliminated from the picture without exchanges, because seeking out someone already holding Bitcoin is neither easier nor cheaper (time=money). I cannot guarantee that this is the majority, but I'm reasonably certain it is.
I have purchased a relatively small sum of bitcoins some time ago, prior to the founding of MtGox. It was a direct exchange between persons, and did not involve an exchange market acting as a matchmaker.
Ok, but that person has to have gotten them somewhere, and it's likely he/she directly or again indirectly falls in one of the three mentioned categories.
This is a reasonable assumption in general, and correct in particular. But my real point is that the exchange markets exist because of convience, not necessity. For if they were really necessary, I wouldn't have been able to buy any prior to MtGox, since they were the first. My method of seeking out an early miner to engage in trade with is both inconvient and time consuming, but it's still a viable way to obtain bitcoins sans any established or otherwise accessible exchange market. I would think that, if all of the exchanges we presently have, were knocked off of the Internet tommorrow, then direct exchanges would return until another exchange market were to pop up to fill the void. The demand creates the market.
I have purchased a relatively small sum of bitcoins some time ago, prior to the founding of MtGox. It was a direct exchange between persons, and did not involve an exchange market acting as a matchmaker.
Ok, but that person has to have gotten them somewhere, and it's likely he/she directly or again indirectly falls in one of the three mentioned categories.
Quote from: MoonShadow
EDIT: I guess this would apply, "bought them at an earlier stage where due to a lower price you can have a hoard that does not need an exchange to be replenished", because you didn't actually mention an exchange acting as a matchmaker or middle man. I just assumed that it was implied.
Right. Some assumptions were made, you could of course have 0.03 BTC from the faucet and just sit on it. This would arguably also fall in the 'hoard' category
Exchanges are a good thing, my point is that they are not critical to the functions of Bitcoin.
Not to the fundamental technical function no. But for practical/economic function very much so, at least in the beginning.
Without them, there is no influx of capital possible, which is needed to enable the merchants taking part to continue taking part until the economy grows large enough so they don't need this external capital (USD, whatever).
Maybe something like Ford starting to pay employees and taking payments in BTC could kickstart a closed loop growth, but this is an extreme balancing act, especially while pricing is volatile.
I can agree with this viewpoint.
Exchanges are a good thing, my point is that they are not critical to the functions of Bitcoin.
Not to the fundamental technical function no. But for practical/economic function very much so, at least in the beginning.
Without them, there is no influx of capital possible, which is needed to enable the merchants taking part to continue taking part until the economy grows large enough so they don't need this external capital (USD, whatever).
Maybe something like Ford starting to pay employees and taking payments in BTC could kickstart a closed loop growth, but this is an extreme balancing act, especially while pricing is volatile.
None of the three conditions apply to myself, but that is not what I was refering to. You can't possiblely know if I'm an exception.
Ok, strictly speaking you are right, I'll rephrase that as "there is a reasonable chance one of these attributes apply to you, but whether or not they do, they will definitely not apply to the majority, who will need exchanges until the economy grows large enough to be sustainable as a closed loop - which I don't think it will for the next decade at least".
I would like to know what other attribute applies to you for this not to be true (which would constitute an exception in itself
), if your anonymity isn't hurt by it. I can't possibly know for sure, but according to the same probabilistic reasoning as above, I will assume you are not Satoshi I have purchased a relatively small sum of bitcoins some time ago, prior to the founding of MtGox. It was a direct exchange between persons, and did not involve an exchange market acting as a matchmaker.
EDIT: I guess this would apply, "bought them at an earlier stage where due to a lower price you can have a hoard that does not need an exchange to be replenished", because you didn't actually mention an exchange acting as a matchmaker or middle man. I just assumed that it was implied.
None of the three conditions apply to myself, but that is not what I was refering to. You can't possiblely know if I'm an exception.
Ok, strictly speaking you are right, I'll rephrase that as "there is a reasonable chance one of these attributes apply to you, but whether or not they do, they will definitely not apply to the majority, who will need exchanges until the economy grows large enough to be sustainable as a closed loop - which I don't think it will for the next decade at least".
I would like to know what other attribute applies to you for this not to be true (which would constitute an exception in itself
), if your anonymity isn't hurt by it. I can't possibly know for sure, but according to the same probabilistic reasoning as above, I will assume you are not Satoshi Which makes you an exception.
You can't possiblely know this with any certainty.
Do you mean none of the three possibilities I listed apply to you?
None of the three conditions apply to myself, but that is not what I was refering to. You can't possiblely know if I'm an exception. You can make such an assumption based on what little of the market you can personally observe, and likely be correct, but you cannot know because of the high degree of anominity.
Which makes you an exception.
You can't possiblely know this with any certainty.
Do you mean none of the three possibilities I listed apply to you? I'm sure there are others that fit these constraints, but you and they are still exceptions if you look beyond the first few thousand early adopters. Imagine millions of users in a year's time. The majority of those will not be paid in Bitcoin, mining will be off the table by then and of course they aren't early adopters with a hoard. Some will be able to accept Bitcoin for their services. The average corporate Joe will not, for quite a while. In this context corporate includes any organization that employs and pays in USD.
I don't need an exchange now. I've never cashed out. I've bought many physical and digital goods, but never cash. I'm sure that day will come, but I'm not really willing to do so before Bitcoin is big enough that local people are asking for exchange.
How many of those were from sellers that could only offer goods for bitcoins because they had access to an exchange?I couldn't possibly answer that question. Exchanges are a good thing, my point is that they are not critical to the functions of Bitcoin. As Bitcoin matures, exchanges will become even less relevant until they are as necessary to the average bitcoiner as the Forex is to the average first world citizen, which is almost zero.
I don't need an exchange now. I've never cashed out. I've bought many physical and digital goods, but never cash. I'm sure that day will come, but I'm not really willing to do so before Bitcoin is big enough that local people are asking for exchange.
How many of those were from sellers that could only offer goods for bitcoins because they had access to an exchange? I don't need an exchange now. I've never cashed out. I've bought many physical and digital goods, but never cash.
Which makes you an exception.
You can't possiblely know this with any certainty.
I don't need an exchange now. I've never cashed out. I've bought many physical and digital goods, but never cash.
Which makes you an exception. You either bought them at an earlier stage where due to a lower price you can have a hoard that does not need an exchange to be replenished, or you were mining with a low difficulty level to the same effect, or you are one of the few people getting paid in Bitcoin.
The majority of Bitcoin users will be none of the above, so they'll need an exchange.
Bitcoin has the advantage of having a public ledger that can be verified by anyone. To be sure, an exchange that produces a flattened market for Bitcoin has certain desirable traits, but it is by no means the only tool in the shed.
As far as I'm concerned the sooner you don't need an exchange at all the better, but I'm not saying that's going to happen soon, or is very realistic to begin with either.
I don't need an exchange now. I've never cashed out. I've bought many physical and digital goods, but never cash. I'm sure that day will come, but I'm not really willing to do so before Bitcoin is big enough that local people are asking for exchange.
Bitcoin has the advantage of having a public ledger that can be verified by anyone. To be sure, an exchange that produces a flattened market for Bitcoin has certain desirable traits, but it is by no means the only tool in the shed.
As far as I'm concerned the sooner you don't need an exchange at all the better, but I'm not saying that's going to happen soon, or is very realistic to begin with either.
Quote from: chodpaba
There are other ways to value Bitcoin. As well there are many means by which hawala transfers can be facilitated.
Seems laborious to use Bitcoin as some kind of token, why not just use signed messages then? If the keys are in a web of trust that is just as good and a lot simpler, no problems with valuation/exchange, dependence on mining network (or any network really, as long as you have the other's public key) etc.
Quote from: chodpaba
Even without the use of hawala brokers it effectively separates the means of deposit and withdrawal, an important feature for some people.
But this presupposes that both ends have the required liquidity. Which in turn would have to mean a symmetrical flow of Bitcoins, or going over exchanges. As soon as the latter is involved, valuation of BTC is going to play a part (and these agents may influence the price too).
transferring money to kenya is a killer app for whom?
obama and his uncle?
obama and his uncle?
There are tons of people who would like to send money internationally for cheaper than they already do.
They don't need an exchange. Bitcoin could simply be used to facilitate a hawala transfer.
They do, since at some point they want to buy cars, boats, food etc. that the regular economy provides. Without an exchange these are not possible, unless as I stated, a legitimate economy already precedes it.
Quote from: chodpaba
You do not need a centralized exchange for hawala, only a way to prove a payment has been agreed to.
I'm not sure what you mean to say. Either why use Bitcoin in the first place when you can just talk to eachother on the phone and make a gentlemen's agreement? Or, Alice gives 100 USD to Bob, Bob uses his network to tell Charlie to give 100 USD (or equivalent) to Donald for an IOU. If this involves Bitcoin for 'network', then Bob and Charlie will have to deal with an exchange, or be one themselves at some point.
Unless of course you are talking about a future where Bitcoin is so big you don't need local currencies, but my point is exactly that in order to get there you have to solve the above problem first.
IMHO this is possible, but not by pie in the sky valuations to attract speculators; rather by attracting merchants who use it for its currency characteristics.
relative: $50 million is only $100 from 500k users. 500k users isn't very much for something popular on the internet. And I suspect the average user wants to hold more than $100 worth of btc.
This
relative: $50 million is only $100 from 500k users. 500k users isn't very much for something popular on the internet. And I suspect the average user wants to hold more than $100 worth of btc.
Jump to: